Buddy pass pax gone wild on AA (July 2018)
Jul 25, 2018, 9:07 am
#122
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: New York City + Vail, CO
Programs: American Airlines Executive Platinum, Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador Elite
Posts: 3,226
Jul 25, 2018, 11:40 am
#123
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Wesley Chapel, FL
Programs: American Airlines
Posts: 30,038
Jul 25, 2018, 2:24 pm
#124
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: New York City + Vail, CO
Programs: American Airlines Executive Platinum, Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador Elite
Posts: 3,226
She needed a police escort to be removed from the airport. I wonder how long she was planning to stick around the airport after being denied boarding? Days, weeks, months, years, decades?
She could have been a real life Tom Hanks from The Terminal.
She could have been a real life Tom Hanks from The Terminal.
Jul 26, 2018, 2:21 am
#125
Join Date: Apr 2009
Programs: American EXP; British Airways Gold
Posts: 1,896
Sugar, your crazy is showing, and you need to tuck that back in.
Jul 26, 2018, 8:40 am
#126
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW/DAL
Programs: AA Lifetime PLT, AS MVPG, HH Diamond, NCL Platinum Plus, MSC Diamond
Posts: 21,422
She needed a police escort to be removed from the airport. I wonder how long she was planning to stick around the airport after being denied boarding? Days, weeks, months, years, decades?
She could have been a real life Tom Hanks from The Terminal.
https://vimeo.com/281690905
She could have been a real life Tom Hanks from The Terminal.
https://vimeo.com/281690905
The only reason I can think of for her wanting to stay is because she wants to harass AA employees.
She says her daughter is an American citizen, as if that is even relative to being denied boarding or being asked to leave the secure side when she isn't flying
Jul 26, 2018, 8:40 am
#127
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,632
I am late to this party, but I wanted to say I did not think she was unacceptably dressed. You may not like her clothing choices, but that isn't the same thing.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
Jul 26, 2018, 9:33 am
#128
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: AA Gold, Enterprise PLT, Marriott Gold
Posts: 604
I am late to this party, but I wanted to say I did not think she was unacceptably dressed. You may not like her clothing choices, but that isn't the same thing.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
She clearly violates at least 2 of the 4 things described above, and on top of that, then acted like a moron and caused a scene because they asked her to change. It's not like they told her "Even if you change you are not getting on" until she blew up and caused a scene, a gigantic no-no for a nonrev.
She is 100% wrong, no question. 99.9999% of passengers don't wear something outrageous like this.... so just because she blends in with the 0.000001% that does, does not mean she blends in with most customers.
Jul 26, 2018, 10:26 am
#129
Join Date: Apr 2009
Programs: American EXP; British Airways Gold
Posts: 1,896
I am late to this party, but I wanted to say I did not think she was unacceptably dressed. You may not like her clothing choices, but that isn't the same thing.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
If this princess wanted to be treated as a queen, she should have purchased a revenue ticket. She didn't. She then royally screwed up.
Jul 26, 2018, 10:36 am
#130
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,632
As you can read further upthread, those rules were relaxed, presumably as a result of the leggings fiasco but I am not sure. One can no longer say "entirely different set of rules and restrictions"---that's obsolete.
Jul 26, 2018, 10:37 am
#131
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South Park, Metropolis
Programs: AA LT PLT 3MM, Hilton/Marriott/SPG/Club Carlson GLD, IHG PLT
Posts: 4,608
She should have arrived JFK by now on the bus. Wonder how this whole thing will finalize, as she appears to still be blocked from her Facebook account.
Jul 26, 2018, 2:35 pm
#132
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: UA-1K, MM, Hilton-Diamond, Marriott-Titanium
Posts: 4,433
She should be blocked forever for that tirade. She was just trying to become a viral sensation and bully all the AA employees she came in contact. Hey, Nardia, how did that work out for you?
Jul 26, 2018, 4:11 pm
#133
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane QLD AU
Programs: QF
Posts: 235
The AA dress code seems a bit wishy washy and non-specific compared to some other airlines. Some non-revs are either not made aware of dress regulations or if they are still choose to disregard the guidelines and wear what they want.
Qantas Airways Limited Find flight listing option at FlyZED ID Travel Airline employees
Qantas Airways Limited Find flight listing option at FlyZED ID Travel Airline employees
Dress code
When travelling on Qantas services rebate passengers must maintain a high standard of dress and grooming. Generally speaking you need to be neat, clean and conservative.
Failure to comply with the following minimum standards - which apply when you board and disembark - may result in you being refused boarding or an upgrade, with the final decision on this at the discretion of the local airport management.
Acceptable: Clean, neat and conservative appearance. All passengers should be well groomed at all times. Tidy denim jeans, near knee-length dress shorts, including demin are acceptable - but you will not be considered for an upgrade if you wear them. Smart national dress. On longhaul flights, it is acceptable to change into a tracksuit after take off.
Not Acceptable: Tracksuits, jeans with cut off and frayed hems, designer holes etc. Singlets, bare midriffs, strapless tops/dresses, overly revealing clothing, rubber thongs/flip-flops or bare feet. Any extremes of leisurewear - including sweatshirts or T-shirts with questionable graphics or language.
Personal hygiene standards must be exemplary.
When travelling on Qantas services rebate passengers must maintain a high standard of dress and grooming. Generally speaking you need to be neat, clean and conservative.
Failure to comply with the following minimum standards - which apply when you board and disembark - may result in you being refused boarding or an upgrade, with the final decision on this at the discretion of the local airport management.
Acceptable: Clean, neat and conservative appearance. All passengers should be well groomed at all times. Tidy denim jeans, near knee-length dress shorts, including demin are acceptable - but you will not be considered for an upgrade if you wear them. Smart national dress. On longhaul flights, it is acceptable to change into a tracksuit after take off.
Not Acceptable: Tracksuits, jeans with cut off and frayed hems, designer holes etc. Singlets, bare midriffs, strapless tops/dresses, overly revealing clothing, rubber thongs/flip-flops or bare feet. Any extremes of leisurewear - including sweatshirts or T-shirts with questionable graphics or language.
Personal hygiene standards must be exemplary.
Last edited by ozflygirl747; Jul 26, 2018 at 4:16 pm
Jul 26, 2018, 5:11 pm
#134
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW/DAL
Programs: AA Lifetime PLT, AS MVPG, HH Diamond, NCL Platinum Plus, MSC Diamond
Posts: 21,422
I am late to this party, but I wanted to say I did not think she was unacceptably dressed. You may not like her clothing choices, but that isn't the same thing.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
At ORD last month, I saw a woman with ripped jeans, not the usual knee and thigh rips, but strategically placed to show skin on both sides of her crotch. In GLA earlier this month, I saw an entire group of what looked like high school students wearing high cut shorts that were essentially bathing suit bottoms, the kind of rear exposure that might get one arrested in some states a decade or two ago.
My point is that standards change. There was a time when miniskirts were controversial. If AA rules are 'wear what others are wearing', this woman wasn't wearing anything actionable. Ugly, yes, but not actionable.
I am NOT defending her subsequent behavior, but I am sure it is upsetting to be denied boarding.
Jul 26, 2018, 5:12 pm
#135
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,653
From The Points Guy: